halofanonfandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Remove Leon2323's admin status?
During the recent O'malley problems, Rot (or maybe another admin, I'm unsure) stated that he never consulted Leon2323 on the "political" matters of Halo Fanon, nor did he have his email address. Checking up on this previously unheard of admin, I found out that he hasn't edited the wikia since July 10, 2007. As such, I must ask, should he really still have his adminship? --MCPO James DavisLOMI HQI hear your cries 14:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC) We should really check if he has abandon his account first before diminishing him from his title. Just avoiding future problems... - Artificial | Intelligence 15:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC) Yeah, and Donut isn't active either anymore (i think). I reckon we need that RfA. Three new admins on baord could really get things up and running again. I think we seriously need some new ones, not at all saying that the one's we've got are bad. However i only really see two admins, which are active (Ajax and S91), and that's why i think we need more admins. And if it is a request system; let the best man (or Subby) win and good luck. (Because you're gonna need it if i'm requesting!!!!!) *Active admins: **Ajax 013 **SPARTAN-091 *Semi-Active admins: **Rot **Dragonclaws **RR *Non-active admins: **Donut **Leon There's what we have folks. --MCPO James DavisLOMI HQI hear your cries 21:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC) I reckon we should make Ajax and S91 beauros and then hold an RfA for 5 new admins. Now that's slightly epic but i think that a completely new change of 'government' would do us all some good. What do you lot think? Correct me if I'm wrong, Bureaucrats are people who started the Wiki, so I think no one is capable of changing that title. Also, I think that the current Administration Team is ok, no need of a RfA. Why? Let's see: #We're a really small community with a minority which really contributes their time making articles. #As per above, new users come and go, problems rarely happens except for those who break rules #If a RfA is to be held, imagine the total number of votes (Quite a small number...) #If a RfA is to be held, I should be promoted right away!! Joking...Lolz - Artificial | Intelligence 16:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC) Bureacrats are those who can elect/un-elect admins, as well as have all other admin powers, so yes, the founder have these powers, but it's not a title solely held by them. I actually heard rumblings at one time in the near past that we were going to have an RfA, but nothing's happened since. --MCPO James DavisLOMI HQI hear your cries 18:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC) I check the site quite often, I'm just not much of a forummer. As for Leon, I believe his account is there so that he can mess with coding stuff. I don't know if I even really count him as a Sysop. But I'm willing to be he knows MediaWiki coding thrice as well as I do, so I won't dispute his adminness. As for Donut...I really don't know what happened to him. I am hesitant to agree with a RfDA of Donut, but...he hasn't been responding to my emails for a long while...so...ya. However, there is also the issue of H*bad's temporary leave. It's an issue that I'd partially forgotten about, but one of the conditions of his leave was that the community hold an RfA for a new admin. It was discussed, but I guess RR forgot during that whole move to Harvard thingy. So here is my suggestion. The community should get together and discuss who they want to RfA in place of H*Bad (another condition of his leave was that when he returned, rather than automatically getting his position back, he wanted an RfA to see if the community still felt he was needed) as well as a RfDA on Donut (and discussion on whether or not Leon should also be RfDA'd). When a general concensus is reached over who we should RfA and the RfDA on Domut has ended, we will hold either one or two RfA's (depending on whether or not Donut is RfDA'd). :--'Master Gunnery Sergeant Hank J Wimbleton IVCOM' 23:26, 16 July 2008 (UTC) Woooow... long winded but yeah! When you say who will be RfA'd, do you mean who will be in it or who will start it? As for Leon and Donut, i'm up for the RfDA. By the way what's the "D" stand for in the second abbreviation? Anyway, what does eveyone else think? R'un '''f'or 'D''e-'''A'dministration... Sorry, but... duh. Regards, SPARTAN-091Admin] [Talk] 18:16, 17 July 2008 (UTC) Well, RfA works like this: You can either nominate yourself (In which most people would do) or people nominate you. Either ways, the majority determines the Winner. - Artificial | Intelligence 18:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC) Alright then, I'll just stick it all right here. --MCPO James DavisLOMI HQI hear your cries 20:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC) RfA Nominees Place your nominees on the line below (make sure to put the name on a new line, make it a link, and put an asterisk (*) behind the name). *Subtank:For general fantastic work in a short amount of time, helping many members, introducing the new members, getting involved with the community and helping with many critical community and wikia matters. *LOMI: A long time member with unwavering dedication to Halo Fanon. He's spent much of his time dedicating work to the community and the wikia and ensuring the quality and style of the wikia is maintained. *SPARTAN-077: A long time member, he has helped many members and does his best to keep people from arguing, flaming, and the like. He is also helpful in keeping people on subject. *The parkster: Been a member for over half a year and has helped the community with policies and contributed high standard work. He links fanon together whenever possible and gives honest and useful feedback when asked to do so. *Sgt. Johnson: A long time member, he's been very helpful and is a wonderful fanon writer. He's nearly left a few times, but he always decides to stay and help instead. Discuss The goal of not immediately doing the RfAs is that I want everyone to discuss why whoever they support should be an admin. If it boils down to a popularity contest...let's just not think of that. Instead, let's discuss why we support people. For the time being, I'm going to remain neutral, because, quite frankly, I don't know everyone as well as you all might. So, let the discussions begin. And please, keep it civil. :p :--'''Master Gunnery Sergeant Hank J Wimbleton IVCOM 01:55, 19 July 2008 (UTC) Kinda agreeing with Rot here, on the popularity at least. Since our community is very small (The active community at least), there's a good chance that this will turn out to be a popularity contest. I hope not...Little_Missy - 02:04, 19 July 2008 (UTC) Oops, guess I kinda forgot some sections, didn't I? Anyways, I too hope it's not just a popularity contest; this shouldn't become some sort of "I'm voting for them because they're my friend" thing. --MCPO James DavisLOMI HQI hear your cries 15:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC) No worries, this'll be a truthful election (if you choose to call it that) -- The State(Our Decrees and Law)( ) 01:22, 20 July 2008 (UTC) So i nominated myself! If i can't do that then take it away but i would really like to have a shot at this. Also, below am i voting for the admin's place or their place as an admin? Which ever one it is, i'll vote yes. :You're voting on whether they should be de-admined or not --MCPO James DavisLOMI HQI hear your cries 18:26, 21 July 2008 (UTC) I believe this is how we should do this. The administration reserves the right to veto any RfDA or RfA. However, if we do, we're going to need a damned good reason. For example, say I find out that Leon was Sysoped for technical stuff, behind the scenes work that wouldn't show up on the Recent Changes, then the administration would consider vetoing his RfDA. Or, say the RfA does turn into a giant popularity contest, and the winner is someone not well suited for a role of responsibility who won through sheer charisma rather than ability, the administration might consider vetoing the RfA. In the event that an RfA is vetoed (which, mind you, is unlikely), another RfA would be held, since there would still be a slot to be filled in the administration team. Now, I doubt this will be necessary, but if something does come to light and we do, I don't want it to be a huge surprise. You guys deserve to know in advance that our role as administrators is to do things that are right, even if they aren't necessarily popular. Now, I think the current two RfDAs should run until...say July 25, 2008. From the looks of it, both are going to be deadministrated. So, once that is resolved, we'll determine how many RfAs we are going to put through, and then everyone will vote. The top three, unless the administration feels there is a very important reason otherwise (or you guys feel that three new admins isn't necessary), will become admins. Does this sound reasonable to you guys? :--'Master Gunnery Sergeant Hank J Wimbleton IVCOM' 00:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC) Yeh, i'm happy with that. So will there be one RfA and the three most voted for users fill in the three admin spaces? I think that three would be good because that way we haven't really lost anything and everyone involved has a better chance at becoming a sysop. That's what i think: Sounds good to me. --MCPO James DavisLOMI HQI hear your cries 14:17, 23 July 2008 (UTC) Alright, well you guys voted, and unanimously at that. I'll talk to Kyle, and as soon as I have, we'll deadmin Leon and Donut. In the mean time, if you guys would like, I'll make an RfA outlining exactly how this will work. Otherwise, I'll make it when Leon and Donut are officially deadmined. :--'Master Gunnery Sergeant Hank J Wimbleton IVCOM' 06:36, 26 July 2008 (UTC) Ookay. -- The State(Our Decrees and Law)( ) 17:37, 26 July 2008 (UTC) Yeh i would de-admin those two users first just to make sure then do the RfA. One step at a time! To respond to Chiafriend's vote against the RfDA on Donut, I would like to point out that if or when Donut does come back, he will easily have ten or eleven emails (I use Gmail, so if you count each time I hit reply, this number triples) from me alone detailing situations as they come and go. He has received several emails from me saying that if he doesn't reply, there is a chance he will be RfDA'd, and later that he is currently up for RfDA. If he comes back, I am sure he will understand our actions considering his complete and total silence. However, while I say these things, this exact reason is why I abstained from voting in both RfDAs. :--'Master Gunnery Sergeant Hank J Wimbleton IVCOM' 09:42, 28 July 2008 (UTC) Fair point actually but if he did want to come back he might have given some notice to abouts when he may come back. Also the vote is going towards his de-adminisation (new word right there!), and that's not saying that your opinion, Chiafriend, is unackowledged but the vioces speak out on this one; and it looks like he's going to get replaced. So, is anything final yet? --MCPO James DavisLOMI HQI hear your cries 21:42, 1 August 2008 (UTC) I think Subtank is a reasonable choice, although admittedly I believe the administrative team and the community must have some time to think about it. Warm regards, [[User:RelentlessRecusant|'RelentlessRecusant']] (Bureaucrat) (Talk) ( ) 15:55, 2 August 2008 (UTC) I appreciate peoples concerns with this issue but the votes speak out and i think we're all pretty clear on what we want from this. I don't think that much more time is needed as not much more needs to be said. However the admins need to speak and discuss this by alll means, but i think that this forum topic has really come to "What now admins? We're waiting on you!" kind of scenario. Now i was hoping that the RfA will commence next week but any later than that and i'll be on holiday with no chance to campaign for sysopage! However if its the community and admin's pure voting and no campaigning from the candidates then thats fine. I'm not saying wait for me but i wouldn't recommend an RfA for a user that isn't even there! And before you all say; no i'm not stepping down as a candidate! Cya: Well, considering, Subtank is a good candidate. However, wouldn't it be better if the candidate actually had experience with being an admin? I mean... this wikia is huge. And, the comunity is fairly large. So, why not choose someone with moderation experience on a forum, along with being an admin on another wiki? -- The Dawn of a new ChronicleArnold Leroy Lewis III Andrew James Lewis SPARTAN-A015 [The Vessel] [The Unit] 05:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC) All valid, except we admins aren't picking the new admins, the community is. Feel free to use that in any campaigning you might do for whoever. As for the current situation...I hate to admit it, but...I can't figure out how to RfDA...Sysop isn't one of the usergroups that I can remove, for some reason. Which means we'll probably need to get assistance from Central Wiki, unless RR or one of the other admins knows how to do it. Since we have hit a small hitch, I think it would be appropriate to start RfAs before the physical RfDAs take place. I'll make the thread sometime tomorrow afternoon, unless I hear otherwise sooner from the other admins. :--'Master Gunnery Sergeant Hank J Wimbleton IVCOM' 05:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC) :Rotaretilbo, you need the staff to remove sysop... any sysop would know that. :P -- The Dawn of a new ChronicleArnold Leroy Lewis III Andrew James Lewis SPARTAN-A015 [The Vessel] [The Unit] 14:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC) Oh so the community is voting? That's gonna be a popularity contest then. Also can the condidates vote too (of course not for themselves)? And back to the point that Sgt.Johny said; yes that is a good idea but the whole point of being a condidate of an RfA is to become and admin. If you are already one like a moderator or something then what's the point. However the point of someone being an admin on another site is good. I'm one if it helps. So if i'm right could i potentially make a campaign to the community about me being the best user for this job? Just a few things i wanted to ask. Well, if we're going with who's been an admin, I've been an admin as well..... now if only 077 and Subby had been them also, then everything'd be even again. --MCPO James DavisLOMI HQI hear your cries 14:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC) May I ask why we need to have been admins?? -- The State(Our Decrees and Law)( ) 17:51, 4 August 2008 (UTC) We don't, they're just trying to campaign for the position. --MCPO James DavisLOMI HQI hear your cries 18:07, 4 August 2008 (UTC) Yeah exactly, if you can show that you can lead then its going to better you chances. However some users may not see that and therefore not take it into account while voting for their desired admin. But you know, it helps! Well AJ, I didn't. I don't know a lot of the technicals of Wikia adminiship. I'll go make an RfA page. I know that a community vote might spiral into a popularity contest, but considering that half the community was screaming that the entire admin team were a bunch of fascists and that they wanted to remove all of us and put in an entire new admin team, a popularity contest was what you guys were going to get one way or the other. I'm sure if the admin team just swooped in and selected new admins, there would be a community outrage about how we were being too controlling or some whatnot like that. So we're going with the community vote this time. And hey, if it does spiral into a popularity contest and the winners are really really bad, the administration does have the right to veto it. So, on the bright side, there is still a small safeguard from popularity contests. It is a minor one, and one that I am sure, if used, would cause at least some of the community to be upset, but at least it is there. :--'Master Gunnery Sergeant Hank J Wimbleton IVCOM' 02:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC) Request for De-Administration of Donut THX 1138 Yes #''I'm Sorry Baby''I Can't Save Your Child, I'm To Busy #MCPO James DavisLOMI HQI hear your cries 21:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC) # - Artificial | Intelligence 07:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC) #Spartan 501 04:14, 19 July 2008 (UTC) # #Eaite'Oodat 00:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC) #SPARTAN-118 #[[w:c:halofanon:User:Spartan 112|'Im Indestructible']] ''A terror to behold'' - No #I really, really, have no idea why you guys think this is a good idea. Doing something as drastic as this can do a lot of damage. If he were to come back, he would be: ##Rather mad that he lost his powers without any say in the matter, ##Feel backstabbed, ##Unaware of this whole discussion, ##Likely to go bad. And as Otter-Man put it, because there's ALWAYS the chance of them coming back no matter HOW long it takes I've seen good editors go down the wrong road all to often because of a simple misunderstanding (for far less things than this) that would lead to an argument and the once good user getting banned. It can, and has, happen 'crats, admins, rollback, anyone. On another note, has he done anything that would warrant him losing sysopship (uncivility, abuse of power, request, etc.)? Wikia staff has better things to do than unsysop someone who could very well come back soon hasn't done anything worth removing his powers for. 00:16, 28 July 2008 (UTC) *Yes, this is the reason I have refrained from voting for Donut's deadministration. He may just need to be temporarily demoted, perhaps to the level of rollback, until he comes back, but I don't think that we should completely de-admin him. SPARTAN-091Admin] [Talk] 18:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC) Request for De-Administration of Leon2323 Yes #--MCPO James DavisLOMI HQI hear your cries 15:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC) #--Little_Missy - 15:41, 19 July 2008 (UTC) #-- #--SPARTAN-091Admin] [Talk] 16:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC) #SPARTAN-118 #[[w:c:halofanon:User:Spartan 112|'Im Indestructible']] ''A terror to behold'' - #--SPARTAN-089 No